PwC Drops Guard On Crypto After US Digital Asset Rule Changes

bitcoinistОпубліковано о 2026-01-06Востаннє оновлено о 2026-01-06

Анотація

PwC, one of the Big Four accounting firms, has reversed its cautious approach toward cryptocurrency following new U.S. regulatory developments, including the Genius Act which regulates stablecoins. The firm is now actively promoting the use of digital asset technology, particularly stablecoins, to improve payment efficiency. This shift reflects growing institutional acceptance of crypto assets, especially stablecoins, which have seen increased adoption globally—including in Hong Kong, Japan, and Europe. Despite recent market consolidation, the stablecoin market cap remains strong near its all-time high at $307 billion. Meanwhile, Bitcoin is trading around $92,900, up 6% over the past week.

Big Four accounting firm PwC has reversed its cautious stance on crypto after regulatory developments related to the space in the United States.

PwC Has Softened Its Stance On Crypto

According to a report from the Financial Times, PwC has changed its strategy around digital assets following the new laws passed by Donald Trump’s administration. PricewaterhouseCoopers, PwC in short, is a multinational professional services network headquartered in London. It provides services such as audits, tax planning, and business consulting to companies worldwide.

PwC is the second-largest firm of its kind and part of the Big Four accounting firms. Previously, the British company steered clear of crypto-related work in the US like other Big Four firms, but it seems that stance has now changed. The shift has come as the US has made advancements in its crypto regulatory framework. Among the new laws is the Genius Act, which regulates stablecoins, digital assets pegged to a fiat currency like the US Dollar (USD).

“The Genius Act and the regulatory rulemaking around stablecoin, I expect, will create more conviction around leaning into that product and that asset class,” said Paul Griggs, senior partner at PwC US, in an interview with FT.

Griggs added that PwC has been pitching companies on how they can use digital asset technology, with stablecoins as a means of improving payment systems’ efficiency, cited as one example.

PwC and other Big Four firms budging on crypto showcases the legislative momentum that the industry has had recently, with traditional finance increasingly unable to ignore the sector. Stablecoins, in particular, have been witnessing growing adoption. Beyond the American Genius Act, this class of digital assets also attracted regulatory attention in other parts of the world.

Hong Kong introduced a stablecoin issuer licensing framework last year, while Japan observed the launch of its first yen-based token. In Europe, major banks have come together to work on a euro-pegged coin, aiming to challenge the sector’s USD dominance. The positive regulation in 2025 meant that the space witnessed some sharp growth, with the market cap exploring new records, as data from DefiLlama shows.

The trend in the market cap of all stablecoins over the last several years | Source: DefiLlama

The sector hasn’t been unaffected by the wider slowdown in crypto since October, however. From the above chart, it’s visible that the stablecoin market cap has seen consolidation in the last few months.

Nonetheless, while other parts of the market have shrunken, these fiat-tied tokens still have their combined market cap sitting at $307 billion today, which is very close to the all-time high (ATH).

Bitcoin Price

At the time of writing, Bitcoin is trading around $92,900, up nearly 6% over the last week.

Looks like the price of the coin has shot up over the last few days | Source: BTCUSDT on TradingView

Пов'язані питання

QWhy has PwC reversed its cautious stance on crypto in the US?

APwC reversed its cautious stance on crypto due to new regulatory developments in the United States, including the Genius Act which regulates stablecoins, providing more clarity and conviction for the asset class.

QWhat is the Genius Act mentioned in the article?

AThe Genius Act is a new US law that regulates stablecoins, which are digital assets pegged to a fiat currency like the US Dollar.

QHow does PwC plan to help companies with digital asset technology?

APwC has been pitching companies on how they can use digital asset technology, with stablecoins cited as a means to improve payment systems' efficiency.

QWhat is the current market cap of all stablecoins according to the article?

AThe combined market cap of all stablecoins is $307 billion, which is very close to the all-time high.

QWhat was the price of Bitcoin at the time of writing the article?

AAt the time of writing, Bitcoin was trading around $92,900, up nearly 6% over the last week.

Пов'язані матеріали

Bank of Japan Signals Interest Rate Hike Despite Keeping Them at 1%

The Bank of Japan (BOJ) kept its benchmark interest rate at 1% on July 31, as widely expected, following a June hike to a 31-year high. The decision passed with an 8-1 vote, with board member Hajime Takata again dissenting in favor of a hike to 1.25%. Despite holding rates steady, the BOJ signaled a hawkish tilt, warning that underlying inflation is likely to accelerate and exceed 2% from the latter half of the fiscal year. While it slightly lowered its core inflation forecast for FY2026, officials expressed stronger confidence that an overshoot will occur later, driven by yen weakness, corporate pricing behavior, and lingering energy shock effects. Markets were focused on the BOJ's forward guidance. Analysts noted the central bank appeared to balance short-term caution with a long-term warning of tighter policy. Governor Kazuo Ueda faces the challenge of reconciling a government reluctant to tighten further with bond markets already pricing in additional hikes, with the timing of the next move debated. Adding complexity, the BOJ reportedly intervened in currency markets hours before the rate decision, buying yen to support the currency which had fallen to 40-year lows against the dollar. Yen weakness stems from the wide U.S.-Japan interest rate gap, high fuel prices, and market skepticism about the pace of BOJ policy normalization. The yield on Japan's 10-year government bonds fell to 2.8%, indicating investor expectations for future monetary tightening.

cryptonews.ru6 хв тому

Bank of Japan Signals Interest Rate Hike Despite Keeping Them at 1%

cryptonews.ru6 хв тому

Why Are Leveraged ETFs like 7709 Inherently Negative EV Products?

This article argues that the SK H力士 2x Leveraged ETF (7709) is fundamentally a negative expected value (EV) product, rather than simply a "double SK H力士" investment. Its core issue stems from its daily rebalancing mechanism to maintain a 2x leverage target. After a price move, the fund must buy more after a rise or sell after a fall to readjust its leverage, creating a systematic pattern of buying high and selling low. This introduces a "delay loss": it always reacts to past price changes, missing potential gains from adjusting earlier during an uptrend and suffering greater losses from adjusting later during a downtrend. While more frequent intraday rebalancing would improve returns in strong, smooth trending markets by reinvesting profits or cutting losses sooner, it also dramatically increases volatility drag (frictional losses) during choppy, oscillating markets due to more frequent high-buy/low-sell trades. The author draws a parallel to an option seller who delta hedges (short gamma), which involves similar "buy high, sell low" dynamic hedging. However, unlike an option seller who receives upfront premium (IV and theta) as compensation for this risk, the leveraged ETF investor receives no such compensation. Instead, they bear all the path-dependent volatility decay, plus additional costs like swap/derivatives financing, management fees, and trading slippage. Thus, the product's return profile can be framed as: 2x directional return minus realized variance drag minus financing costs minus derivatives costs minus management fees minus transaction costs. For the investor to profit, SK H力士's price must not only rise significantly but do so in a strong, sustained, and smooth trend to overcome these inherent structural costs. High volatility and frequent price reversals are particularly damaging. The article also notes that while the ETF has no explicit liquidation line like perpetual futures, avoiding a sudden "blow-up," its net asset value can still decay towards zero over time through this combination of volatility drag and fees. For experienced traders, directly managing leverage via perpetual contracts may offer more control and potentially lower costs than this packaged, mechanistic product.

marsbit13 хв тому

Why Are Leveraged ETFs like 7709 Inherently Negative EV Products?

marsbit13 хв тому

'Backstabbing' or 'Win-Win'? How Likely Is TradeXYZ to Break Away from Hyperliquid and Go Solo?

The article discusses the growing debate over whether TradeXYZ, which dominates Hyperliquid's HIP-3 market with over 90% of its volume, might break away to build its own independent trading platform. This possibility is fueled by TradeXYZ's immense market influence and the common industry trend of successful projects seeking more control and profit capture. Key arguments for a potential split include TradeXYZ's overwhelming contribution to Hyperliquid's metrics and the financial incentive to retain all transaction fees, as it currently splits them 50/50 with Hyperliquid. The piece draws parallels to other cases, like Anthropic's "Claude Code" competing with its former partner Cursor, suggesting "betrayal" can occur when business leverage shifts. However, strong counterarguments suggest a split is unlikely or would be detrimental. TradeXYZ relies on Hyperliquid's high-performance infrastructure and its platform as a primary user acquisition channel. Building a comparable system would be challenging. Furthermore, the founders of both projects share a history of trust and mutual admiration. The analysis concludes that a separation would likely be a lose-lose scenario: Hyperliquid would lose a major growth narrative and trading volume, while TradeXYZ would face technical hurdles, user migration issues, and reputational damage, potentially allowing competitors to seize market share. The most rational path is seen as continued collaboration, with TradeXYZ potentially negotiating better terms while leveraging Hyperliquid's established strengths.

marsbit23 хв тому

'Backstabbing' or 'Win-Win'? How Likely Is TradeXYZ to Break Away from Hyperliquid and Go Solo?

marsbit23 хв тому

Торгівля

Спот
活动图片